Derek Powell CLC 24 February 2011 IEC working session: Gauteng Local Democracy Peace and Human Security

Derek Powell CLC24 February 2011

IEC working session: Gauteng

Local Democracy Peace and Human Securitywww.ldphs.org.za

What is wrong with SA local democracy?

Some narratives doing the rounds about the state of local government

– Local government is dysfunctional due to corruption, incompetence, lack of accountability, and poor service delivery

– Violent service delivery protests are a symptom of this collapse– “Service delivery protests” are a socio-economic phenomenon

“driven” by extreme poverty and inequality – The protests challenge the legitimacy of local democracy, which is

excluding rather than including poor communities in particular– National intervention is needed to fix service delivery and public

participation– Protests are a symptom that SA is sliding towards a “a failed state”

(watch out for Tunisia Eqypt!)Local Democracy Peace and Human

security

What do we know and say about these protests?

Municipal service delivery protests

What is the relationship between different protests over different issues in different parts of the country?

Why then do most of the service-delivery related grievances seem to relate to housing (a provincial function)?

The term is not defined, loosely used, and analytically imprecise

Protests are now a socio-economic phenomenon

What does that mean exactly?

What is the start line for this new phenomenon?

How does it differ from historical forms of the phenomenon?

Protests are driven by inequality

What does driven mean? What is the causal link?

Why are there fewer protests in rural areas where inequality is highest?

Isn’t rate-payers withholding rates another form of protest?

National intervention needed?

What part does national policy failure play in this?

Why not more local self-government?

Local Democracy Peace and Human security

Failed/fragile states • Predictive measurements of the riskiest countries vis-a-vis

three main threats:– Deadly internal conflict– Humanitarian disaster– Threat to global security

• Fragility is a condition of collapsing central authority • There are 2 failed states: Haiti, Somalia• On what analytical basis are collapsed states/authoritarian

states compared with open liberal constitutional democracies




How do we measure the quality of local democracy?

• Voice and accountability:– World Bank Governance Matters VI– Afro-barometer (Idasa local barometer)

• Institutional features of our local democracy:– Local citizens elect political parties (PR) and individuals (ward based)

to represent them in council (representative democracy)– Major national parties are also major local parties – Citizens have right to participate in local affairs (participatory

democracy)– Councils are held accountable in elections (Consolidation of

democracy)– LG must overcome historical exclusion (Transformative or inclusive

democracy)Local Democracy Peace and Human

security

Indicators?• Citizens satisfaction with local democracy• Registration and turnout rates on election day• Growth in number of parties participating• Citizen participation (?) in participatory structures• Other forms of “Voice” and their impact on

democratic accountability: Violent protests• Inter-communal cooperation between elections


General trends in participation and confidence

Low but stable voter turnout 1995/96 (49%) 2000 (49%) 2006 (48%)

Increased representation of women 1995/96 (18.5%) 2000 (28.2%) 2006 (39.7%)

Increased party participation 2000 (79) 2006 (97) – 56 parties represented

Declining public confidence 2006 (44%) 2007 (34%): HSRC.Are municipalities well managed? 2004 (49%) 2007 (41%): Ipsos Markinor

Low public awareness 3 % aware of participatory measures

Provide democratic & accountable government Provide services to meet basic needs Promote social & economic development Involve citizens in the governance of local affairs Promote a safe and healthy environment

Developmental local government:

Sources: IEC, CGTA, HSC, Ipsos- Markinor


Important life domains (for elites and public)

Values Elite % Elite rank Public % Public rank

Family 96.7 1 95.6 1Work 82.8 2 77.4 1Religion 55.4 (47) 4 69.9 3Politics 54.8 3 21.7 6Friends 53.8 5 33.9 5Leisure time 42.4 6 37.1 4

Source: Kotze “values and democracy in South Africa: comparing elite and public values”


Participatory governance Setting the scene – aided awareness of people, structures, organisations, initiatives

Source: Q.9a (aided)

37

24

16

16

8

2

42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Name of councillor

How to register for local/municipal elections

The Batho Pele principle

Ward number

The approximate date of local governmentelections

The Integrated Development Plan

None of the above

%

Who is particularly unaware?White 64Didn't vote in last local govt. elections 60LSM (7-10) 54Not wanting involvement in municipal decisions 531-2 people 53HH income R10 001+ 53Rented accomm. 52

• More than a third of Tshwane’s citizens is aidedly unaware of their councillor. It appears that more affluent people are less aware of the above than less affluent people. This could be a function of three issues:

• Apathy amongst this group• Limited opportunity to be involved (e.g. meetings not held in area or at inconvenient times)• Limited time

n=1300Of these citizens, 66% have personally met their councillor


Meeting%

Attendance (n=1300)

Ward meeting 27

School governing body meetings 15

Street committee or neighbourhood meeting 13

Residents' association meeting 7

Community development forums 6

Community policing forums 3

Mayoral imbizos 3

IDP meetings 1

None of the above/Never 52How does attendance behaviour differ across different segments of citizens?Let's take a look

Source: Q.10a (aided)Read: 27% of the Tshwane citizens have attended a ward meeting

ParticipationActual involvement – attendance of meetings

31% (nett) of the Tshwane population have attended at least one of these meetings – we will henceforth refer to these people as ‘engaged’

More than half of citizens have not attended any of the prompted meetings – this is likely to some degree to be linked to low levels of awareness and high levels of not wanting to be involved


Citizens more likely to be engaged % Higher engagement1

Voted 45

Informal 45

5+ people 44

Black 41

Primary school or less 41

R1-R2000 41

R2001-R5000 41

LSM (1-4) 40

LSM (5-6) 40

Unemployed 40

Source: Q.10a (aided)1 A citizen is deemed to be engaged if he/she has attended a ward meeting, mayoral imbizo, community development forum and/or an IDP meeting

ParticipationActual involvement – attendance of meetings (continued)

Average of total pop.: 31% (n=1300)

Again, we see that less affluent people are more likely to be engaged with the City of Tshwane


Current state of research on protests

• Little academic research (generally case studies)

• Almost all media analysis is based on media reports and speculation

• Caution in use of statistics is needed • Take citizen grievances as such?


• Many outstanding questions about protests:

– How representative are protests (ward, across wards, across municipality)?

– Who are the protesters – What is their average age? Are they voting age?

– How are protests organized?– How do protesters see the relationship between

protests and voting?– Why are some protests violent, and others not?


Increasing in frequency and violence

Violent protest (% of total) 2007: 41.6% 2008: 38% 2009: 43.6 % 2010: 54%

Source: CLC research 2010 “The rage, violence and destructiveness” vented in some protests is a symptom of “a more fundamental alienation of people from our democracy” and an “acute sense of marginalization and social exclusion.” (DM CGTA, Yunus Carrim, speech to NCOP 2010)

Protests generally do not correlate with voters punishing parties in elections (Booysen)



Highly urbanized provinces (informal settlements in metros) worst affected

Areas with highest poverty are not the main hotspots

Relative poverty a facilitating factor (competition for jobs and resources)Local Democracy Peace and Human

security


The relationship between protests and elections (research by Professor Booysen Wits)

Consolidation of democracy: voters punish parties that don’t perform and reward those that do or can

Three waves of protest:- Before 2006 elections (local grievances – growing discontent- Between 2007-2008 (locals blamed for system wide grievances)- Post 2008 (frustration + attacks on foreign nationals)

Protests supplement not substitute elections as a control - Voter turnout rate is stable despite protests- Same parties are often returned


Impacts

Financial Negligible (2-11% withheld)

Social/political Erodes social cohesion

A spark for other forms of protest

Undermines local confidence

Undermines rule of law

Fast facts

Total withheld R10 mill (35 towns)

R3 mill (1 municipality)

+- 50% (2 municipalities)

No. disputes decl. 70 (335 on NTU list)

Business sector? No involvement

Who withholds Not all RA’s

Not all members of RA

Repayment? In some cases

Duration of dispute Between 2-5 years (10 yrs)

A new form of protest in more affluent communities ?

Response to actual service delivery failure

Sewage/sanitation: Raw sewage flowing into rivers, dams and water supply – threatening public health

Potable water: Lack of potable water supply to town due to inadequate maintenance of infrastructure

Electricity cut-offs: Eskom threats to cut off municipalities electricity due to non-payment of account

Source: CLC research 2010

Governance problems: capacity, maladministration, corruption, poor communication and accountability


Huge service delivery challenges Poor communication with communities & accountability Problems with the political-administrative interface Fraud and corruption Inter and intra-party issues negatively affecting governance

Responsive, accountable, effective & efficient local government

Sets out 7 outputs that form the basis of the Minister of CGTA’s performance contract with the President and service delivery agreements with MECs

State of Local Government Report (Oct 2009)

Turnaround strategy/ outcome 9 (2010)


• CGTA raises idea of single election in 2010

• Three main reasons for idea: – The high costs of running separate elections, – Would improve coordination of policy and implementation– Would facilitate deployment of senior politicians to LG

• Major criticisms of the idea: – Single election would destroy local democracy– Would require major adjustment to financial year, infrastructure planning and

auditing

• Confusing reports on outcome of Summit :– Idea was rejected?– Idea was not discussed?

Review separate election for local government?


In conclusion: some thoughts and questions:

- We need media debate and public policy that is better informed by rigorous research, and greater care is needed in making sweeping statements given the gaps in data

- Is there a real local politics and how well do we understand the forces shaping it?

- Is local politics and self-government simply a reflex of national politics?

- Have protests become institutionalized as a form of extracting accountability, and if so what impact does this have on the legitimacy of our local democracy?

- If political and economic power still track historical cleavages, have we experimented enough with local democracy – to incentivize a politics of over-coming cleavages?

Documents

Derek Powell CLC 24 February 2011 IEC working session: Gauteng Local Democracy Peace and Human Security